Warhammer Underworlds

[Jye Nicolson]

Slayer is real good for Chaos (Corruptor is probably good too but Slayer should be reliable). I think there might be a mismatch in Destruction's emphasis on flanking and which teams can actually use the Warscrolls but maybe being a better player than me gets you around that. Similarly I think Death relies a little too much on actions from the leader but that has a lot of precedent.

I reckon the Grand Alliance warbands will do all right! Doesn't seem to me that anyone will be unable to have a decent game with any of their warbands.

[The Other Dave]

Gosh, yeah, Steelhearts put out some big numbers, huh? Balanced, I suppose, by no ranged attacks and a blistering move of 3 across the board. Ironskull's Boyz definitely got a glow-up too, not that that was a high bar to pass.

Most of the GA warscrolls look OK to me - Order has the one that wants you to stay in your own territory, which has negative synergy with some stuff in some of the rivals decks, but Chaos and Destruction both have two solid entries. Death looks... weird. The necromancy one is cool and all but wants you to have minions and/or 2- or 3-wound fighters, which only 2 of the 4 warbands have (Exiled Dead will love it though), and the other one is just odd. Buut the two warbands that'd use it (Wraithcreepers and Mournflight) are doing well enough in the stats department they might not mind too much.

[Jye Nicolson]

Really pleased with the new edition after four games today.

The new crit rules are much better - they still matter and there's still scope for a good defence roll to ruin plans but less whiffing and more scope to play around it.

Didn't miss board placement. Back to no lethal hexes but that's happened before and I'm sure seasonal boards will continue to shake things up.

Underdog is a good mechanic. Getting an extra card if you lose the turn rolloff works well too.

The decks were good - aggro deck was straightforward and very strong but a lot of the classic cards that make it that way have increased costs and Annihilation is a big ask to score. Conversely Countdown is all shenanigans all the time and while not straightforwardly good can absolutely pull out enough nonsense to run away with it. I ended up tabling poor Suzuki-san at the top of the third by blowing up his wounded fighters!

I only tried teams with bespoke rules but Dave seemed just fine using "legends" Magore. Mologg being was the only mechanical dud note of the day, either we missed something about Stalagsquig or it's in need of an errata/clarification to avoid being an active liability.

Lots of fun and looking forward to more.

[The Other Dave]

I have similar thoughts! All the rules changes are positive, the rules and their presentation are streamlined in a very good way, and warbands definitely feel distinct and characterful.

It felt like the first puzzle of the new edition will be what decks work best with what warbands - aside from Mollog everything seemed more or less "of a level" and people who were struggling were mostly having trouble getting their warband to do what their deck was asking them to do. Zarbag and their very good action efficiency (at least when it comes to moving around on the board) had pretty ridiculous synergy with the take and hold deck, but I also think people will get better at counterplay as time goes on - letting goblins stand on treasure tokens is kind of an entry-level mistake TBH.

I was honestly surprised at how well the Fiends did with their grand alliance warscroll, at least once I chose the side that they like better.

Definitely looking forward to more plays with the game! The big turnout was a good sign, too.